There are 29308 comments on the
National Ledger
story from Jan 12, 2008, titled Ron Paul on the Verge of Going Third Party?.
In it, National Ledger reports that:

Rep. Ron Paul's 1988 Libertarian Presidential campaign started with great promise: A former four-term Republican US Congressman running on the ticket of America's third largest party.
via National Ledger

Just returned from one of Thailand's super duper vacation islands. Well as far as I'm conserned it sucks, rained at least once every day, humidity was 95, temp in the 90's+, filled with tattooed European trash and some Aussies or Kiwi's. Overly large women that looked like tackles for the Stealers with nasty knotted hair and tiny swimming suits. Great gobs of white flesh hanging out everywhere. Trust me it was not a sight sane, sophistacated people would want to see. In other words it sucked, and although I was at a 5 star resort where I was sheltered from those sights I did venture out to town, which was not a pretty sight,but not as much as the sight of Bozo and Hillary walking in a Thai temple, that was enough to make me want to puke. The blood of two good men fresh on their hands, and what do they do, vacation! Americans are getting more stupid every year.I know you missed me!!

<quoted text>Look CNP, if you build or buy/rent a house near water there is a good chance that one day the shit will hit the fan. And if you decided to live near the oceans or the gulf coast your going to have a problem with storms every year. Why do people live on the outer banks, when every year they are hit with storms, why? I for damn sure do not believe that the government should pay for their stupidity or for that matter the insurance companies. if they want to live by the ocean then they need to suck it up when the shit hits the fan. No compassion from this guy!

Why do they live there ?Because the federal government rewards them by assuming their risk.

I don't know about dedicated. In fact I would rather fight whatever is coming then have my son go through it, but if I can change the path I am damn sure going to try....come to think of it - I have spent my whole life fighting either literally or figuratively - I have no issue with it and function very well in chaos. It is my boy's life that I am now concerned with.

Better teach him how to fight, when to fight and most importantly teach him Why We Fight !

<quoted text>Having been away from paper boys for a few years I don't know the answer, but here's what I think happened the price of materials went up, this caused the paper to jack up the price, then the government came in and raised the minimum wage, the paper boy not being stupid figured out that he could make a few more bucks.Do I get an attaboy and gold star?The oath is to obey the orders of those placed above me and that includes the dip-shit president as commander in chief.I am all for products being made in America by American labors, be they farmers, ranchers or whatever, but they all have to compete on the world markets and the unions have priced themselves out of that market and to be honest they have pushed aside a hell of a lot of Americans who can not afford there products. They are selling to the elites not average Joe Blow. I may add also not to the majority of minorities. Gold Star for sure on that one!!!!

Its not the unions that drove prices up, EasyPrices are up due to monetary expansion, federal expansion and empire.

<quoted text>Fascism is a type of government not an ideology and can exist in the left or right portion of the spectrum. It is simply the rule of a few for the benefit of a few. Not to be confused with what some claim we have devolved to which is an oligarchy - the rule of a few for the supposed benefit of the many. I personally believe we walk an increasingly blurry line between these two types of governments while being duped that we live in a Republic.

Depends on your basic belief.If one believes the far right is anarchy then a type of government cannot exist. In other words fascism cannot exist when government is absent.Just to the left of anarchy is the libertarian. All else is left, including any and all forms of collectivism.

<quoted text>I too thought Romney would win, not because of what some pundit said but because I never thought that the American public would vote for a socialist government and bozo is a socialist. Can't wait to see what the unemployment rate will soon be as companies start to lay off folks.

I knew who would win - George Bush and Wall Street, again. Four more years of Bush was a given, it was the only choice.

Unemployment numbers are a Gestapo scam, Easy. They calimed right before the election the numbers were getting better......then three days ago revised those numbers from last month to show it had really gotten worse. Check it out - they are always "revised" later to reveal the truth that was covered up. In other words the federal government lied, again.

You may see it as Obama lied, Bush lied or Clinton lied.......the locals are far less sophisticated. We simply say the government lied and leave it at that.

<quoted text>Ron Paul was doing it.You did not have the support nor enthusiasm of the Ron Paul crowd. You never will.That's why Romney lost. He would have had to answer to the Ron Paul crowd in the republican party. They are better off with Obama to push the collapse through. They are creating division amongst the people.

You are still hung up on Ron Paul personally and his approach to governance. It is categorically nonsense todeclare that Ron Paul was reaching in anything remotely called meaningful into the demographics that overwhelminglysupported Obama .... African Americans and Hispanics.And from the results I've seen, the military vote largelywent to Romney, not Obama.

You are one delusional dude to believe that Romney had anyobligation to "answer to the Ron Paul crowd." What the Ron Paul crowd failed to understand is that they are the tail,not the head nor the heart, of the Republican Party. Inmy opinion for every Ron Paul supporter who came over to theRomney side because Romney "answered to the Ron Paul crowd,"Romney would have lost one or more votes from the independentmiddle.

I see little reason for much further discourse with a personwho, like yourself, seems to relish a collapse which wouldresult in the suffering of millions of Americans under thecancerous logic that it would not have happened had the nationlistened to you. Fact is I may agree with you that a seriouscollapse is fairly imminent, but I do not take the vindictivepleasure you seem to enjoy as you contemplate it.

Finally, when your declared leader spends time in his "farewellspeech" (attended by how many?) touting this peculiar crap aboutsecession, it is pretty fair evidence among 98% of the country that he deteriorated into a peculiar political loon. 98%. Yeah, that's about right. That's about the percentage of peoplewho had concluded that Ron Paul was not suitable for higher office.

After all, it was only 4 or 5 years ago that Ron Paul wason the chicken dinner banquet circuit building support amongfossils of the old South who still fly the confederate flagand toast secession. I've seen the videos, javy. They are there on the internet if you care to look for them.

But you are right about one thing .... he has not changed in30 years. I for one am proud that I have. I am proud that the mature, intelligent people I know have changed their viewson dozens of things. That Ron Paul hasn't is not to his credit.It was and is his downfall.

<quoted text>Agreed! Ron Paul had the young crowd, the fiscal crowd, independent crowe. Only thing he missed were the globalists and theocrats.I wants my free gifts now. lol

CNP - You haven't one scrap of evidence to provethat Ron Paul "had the young crowd" or the "independentcrowd." Please don't use the attendance numbers at a political rally as evidence. I know you need to believeit to have been so, but the "youth" vote was easily won by Obama and Romney did reasonably well among independentscompared to Bush.

If conservatives of any stripe are to EVER get out of the also-ran position they MUST accept the reality ofneeding to welcome and nurture the development of demographic categories of white men and white women.

I hope everyone has as great a Thanksgiving as I will. two Butterballs, one Prague ham, and all the other stuff, plus some very nice wines with a few friends. Damn life is good!Happy Thanksgiving All!!!!!

<quoted text>I agree 100 %. Hopefully next time they will drop the stupid social issues and concentrate on the fiscal ones.The tea party which was really started by Paul had a great rise. The downfall came when they were co-opted by the neoc0n globalists/statist corporate fascisi. From there I knew it was over for them. Once Dick Army and Koch brothers got involved you knew it wasn't long before the freedom movement became "evangelicalized" (lol) There where the hope bye bye.I'm glad the flip flopper lost though. We should've stood the honest Paul instead of the "ill say completely opposite things from day to day" man.Enjoy your weekend all.

I don't remember Mitt talking about social issues like abortion, though. He talked, for the most part, about the economy, even ignoring Benghazi-gate at the last debate because it would have been off-message.I thought you would have voted for Romney, simply because he was the last chance to defeat Obamacare. Ron Paul will never be the GOP nominee, and I imagine that he won't even be running next time at 81 years of age.

I don't agree with those who say that Ron Paul would have beaten Obama. The Democrats would have dredged up tons of stuff on him and his more peculiar libertarian positions. They would have brought up the newsletters, his opposition to the Civil Rights Act, his belief that Social Security and Medicare are unconsitutional, and his notion that the Catholic Church and other charities should be stuck with taking care of people who can't afford health insurance. The narrative from the media would be how "out there" Ron Paul is (sort of like Goldwater, except without the nukes); Ron Paul wouldn't have even gotten a chance to talk about the economy because he would have been too busy explaining and defending his positions on issues. The Dems would have mentioned that Dr. No is totally against government loans to students, and that would have taken care of the youth vote, one of Paul's supposedly strongest voting blocks. The Democrats would have painted him as wanting to take America backwards, instead of "Forward" like Obama. I truly think that Romney, or perhaps Huntsman, was the GOP's best chance. The Republicans have to figure out what direction they want to go, but I don't think that adopting the entire platform of the Libertarian Party is the solution.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.